Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Energy and carbon inventory of Iowa swine production facilities


Author Info

  • Lammers, P.J.
  • Honeyman, M.S.
  • Harmon, J.D.
  • Helmers, M.J.
Registered author(s):


    This study evaluates energy and carbon use by two types of facilities--conventional confinement and hoop barn-based--within farrow-to-finish pig production systems scaled to produce 5200 and 15,600 market pigs annually in Iowa. The United States is the world's second largest producer of pork with pig production centered in the state of Iowa. Conventional confinement facilities are typical of pork industry practice in the United States and are characterized by individual gestation stalls and 1200 head grow-finish buildings with slatted concrete floors and liquid manure systems. The hoop barn-based alternative uses group pens in bedded hoop barns for gestation and finishing. Both systems use climate controlled farrowing facilities with individual farrowing crates as well as climate controlled nursery facilities. Feed is the single largest operating resource in pig production systems and feed fed to grow-finish pigs accounts for 63-65% of total energy use in raising pigs. The other stages of production are more reliant on non-renewable fuels and ignoring these stages of production misses 54-80% of the non-renewable fuel use associated with pig production. Taking into account demonstrated performance differences, hoop barn-based pig production requires 2.4% more feed and similar total energy as conventional pig production. Hoop barn-based pig production requires 63-64% less non-renewable fuel and results in 35% less emissions. There is little (

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Agricultural Systems.

    Volume (Year): 103 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 8 (October)
    Pages: 551-561

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:8:p:551-561

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page:

    Related research

    Keywords: Swine production Hoop barns Energy use Carbon emissions;


    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Delgado, Christopher L. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Steinfeld, Henning & Ehui, Simeon K. & Courbois, Claude, 1999. "Livestock to 2020: the next food revolution," 2020 vision discussion papers 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Uhlin, Hans-Erik, 1998. "Why energy productivity is increasing: An I-O analysis of Swedish agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 443-465, April.
    3. Lammers, P.J. & Kenealy, J.B. & Kliebenstein, James & Harmon, Jay D. & Helmers, Matthew J. & Honeyman, Mark, 2010. "Nonsolar Energy Use and One-Hundred-Year Global Warming Potential of Iowa Swine Feedstuffs and Feeding Strategies," Staff General Research Papers 31866, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Stone, James J. & Dollarhide, Christopher R. & Benning, Jennifer L. & Gregg Carlson, C. & Clay, David E., 2012. "The life cycle impacts of feed for modern grow-finish Northern Great Plains US swine production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 1-10.
    2. Pelletier, N. & Lammers, P. & Stender, D. & Pirog, R., 2010. "Life cycle assessment of high- and low-profitability commodity and deep-bedded niche swine production systems in the Upper Midwestern United States," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(9), pages 599-608, November.


    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:103:y:2010:i:8:p:551-561. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.